Why not enhance your privacy by using the free Tor Browser? For an alternative, system-wide implementation of Tor, try The Amnesiac Incognito Live System. For better anonymity, guest posting is enabled, and you may use a made-up e-mail address (e.g., visitor@antipolygraph.org) when posting as a guest.

Try the chat room to communicate anonymously with other visitors presently online; messages are deleted within 24 hours. (Choose a user name and leave the password field blank.)

I'm sorry if I posted this in the wrong place but I thought it was kind of on the subject. I was wondering if anyone knew any other states that have banned polygraph testing or is in the process of banning them. Is there a website that has this info on the states?

In addition to Oregon, lie detector "testing" is prohibited from the workplace in Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, and New Jersey.

George W. MaschkeTel/SMS: 1-202-810-2105 (You can reach me at this number securely, and without it appearing in your billing records, using Signal for iPhone or RedPhone & TextSecure for Android.)Threema: S7TK4RXRTo contact me privately on a computer, install Peerio and add 1 as a contact.E-mail/iMessage/FaceTime:maschke@antipolygraph.orgPGP Public Key:316A947CPGP Public Key (offline):2BF4374BEncrypted voice and text chat (XMPP via Jitsi): georgemaschke@jit.siPostal mail: Van Trigtstraat 53, 2597 VX The Hague, The NetherlandsPersonal Statement:"Too Hot of a Potato"

It is no longer illegal for Oregon LE agencies to use the polygraph as a pre-hiring screening tool. The law was changed last year. They can now use it, but cannot use the results of the polygraph solely as the reason to deny employment. (Yeah, right).

"Although the degree of reliability of polygraph evidence may depend upon a variety of identifiable factors, there is simply no way to know in a particular case whether a polygraph examiner's Conclusion is accurate, because certain doubts and uncertainties plague even the best polygraph exams." (Justice Clarence Thomas writing in United States v. Scheffer, 523 U.S. 303, 118 S.Ct. 1261, 140 L.Ed.2d 413, 1998.)

In addition to Oregon, lie detector "testing" is prohibited from the workplace in Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, and New Jersey.

I wonder if those states have a higher percentage of "bad cops" or corruption, or police misconduct. It would be a facinating study, to see if the polygraph screening actually results in a better cop. I postulate that just the opposite would be found, and here is why.

By using polygraph screening as opposed to a thorough background check, the agency simply gets people who have no life experience, (like have never done anything wrong) or people who can manipulate the results of the polygraph to fool the examiner. With either group, one would likely think they would be more susceptable to tempation than a good ol Joe who has proven him self trustworthy through his acts and deeds.

"Although the degree of reliability of polygraph evidence may depend upon a variety of identifiable factors, there is simply no way to know in a particular case whether a polygraph examiner's Conclusion is accurate, because certain doubts and uncertainties plague even the best polygraph exams." (Justice Clarence Thomas writing in United States v. Scheffer, 523 U.S. 303, 118 S.Ct. 1261, 140 L.Ed.2d 413, 1998.)

In addition to Oregon, lie detector "testing" is prohibited from the workplace in Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, and New Jersey.

I wonder if those states have a higher percentage of "bad cops" or corruption, or police misconduct. It would be a facinating study, to see if the polygraph screening actually results in a better cop. I postulate that just the opposite would be found, and here is why.

By using polygraph screening as opposed to a thorough background check, the agency simply gets people who have no life experience, (like have never done anything wrong) or people who can manipulate the results of the polygraph to fool the examiner. With either group, one would likely think they would be more susceptable to tempation than a good ol Joe who has proven him self trustworthy through his acts and deeds.

Agencies that rely heavily on the polygraph will also have a lower than expected portion of employees who are critical thinkers since those sorts of people are the most likely to doubt the validity of the polygraph and the most likely to learn about how it really works.

Because knowledge of how the polygraph really works correlates negatively with the chances of a truthful person to pass the polygraph polygraphers do everything they can to keep people from finding out the truth. This includes attempts to keep people from questioning authority, a task more fit for an SS agent than a police officer.

It also includes attempts to discredit scientific research by people outside the polygraph-industrial complex and attempts to manipulate and spin the results of research conducted by friendly supporters, something which should give all Americans concern in an age where science is so vitally important to our society. Creationists must love polygraphers, they're on the same page when it comes to promoting real science and critical thought.

Polygraphers probably keep their children stupid so that they can more easily detect their lies. Yeah, when they're so dumb they think you're going to believe they didn't eat the missing cookies while having crumbs all over their shirt you'll probably be able to tell pretty easily when they're lying. A polygrapher stops thinking at that point and considers that a good deal, never taking the next step to consider whether the cost of infantilizing their child is in anyone's long-term interest.

This is NOT true. My boyfriend just got sent to jail for 16 months and 104 days because a judge determanded his character based on a false deception on his polygraph and he is in Oregon. Might depend on the county. His is clackamas.